Dunn v. City of Seattle et al
| Brendan Dunn |
| City of Seattle and Does 1-200 |
| 2:2018cv00257 |
| February 19, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Washington |
| Seattle Office |
| XX US, Outside District |
| James L. Robart |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
63
ORDER granting the City's 46 Motion for Summary Judgment, denying as moot Mr. Dunn's oral motion for continuance. The Court dismisses this action with prejudice. Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (TH)
|
|
Filing
58
ORDER Scheduling Oral Argument re Defendant City of Seattle's 46 MOTION for Summary Judgment : Motion Hearing set for 10/30/2019 at 10:00 AM; denying any request to delay or reschedule oral argument; granting Mr. Hildes the option to appear telephonically at the hearing. The City shall file on the docket a complete copy of the August 5, 2019, deposition of Mr. Dunn by 12:00 p.m. on October 21, 2019. Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (SWT)
|
|
Filing
57
MINUTE ORDER AMENDING PRETRIAL DEADLINES: Plaintiffs Pretrial Statement due by 10/18/2019, Defendants' Pretrial Statement due by 10/28/2019, Parties' LCR 16(k) Conference to be completed by 11/4/2019, Pretrial Order due by 11/12/2019 at 12:00 PM, Deposition Designations due to court by 11/15/2019. Authorized by Judge James L. Robart. (SWT)
|
|
Filing
56
ORDER granting in part and denying in part Defendant City of Seattle's 52 Motion to Strike Plaintiff Brendan Dunn's Expert Witnesses. Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (SWT)
|
|
Filing
55
ORDER denying Plaintiff's 54 Motion for Relief From Deadline Pursuant to LCR 7(j). Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (SWT)
|
|
Filing
43
ORDER re: Parties' 42 Stipulated Motion to Substitute Reply Brief. Clerk is directed to substitute the attached Reply brief in place of the previously filed Reply 40 . Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (PM)
|
|
Filing
37
ORDER denying Plaintiff's 35 Motion for Reconsideration of the Court's Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Parties' Second Stipulated Motion to Amend the Case Schedule. Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (SWT)
|
|
Filing
31
ORDER granting in part and denying in part parties' 30 Second Stipulated Motion to Amend Case Schedule: Expert Witness Disclosure/Reports under FRCP 26(a)(2) due by 7/24/2019, Motions due by 7/24/2019. Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (SWT)
|
|
Filing
26
STIPULATION AD ORDER to Amend Case Schedule re parties' 25 Stipulated Motion: Plaintiff's disclosure of expert testimony due 6/5/2019, Defendant's disclosure of expert testimony due 7/5/2019. Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (SWT)
|
|
Filing
23
STIPULATION AND ORDER for extension of time re parties' 22 Stipulated Motion: Defendant to answer First Amended Complaint by 12/19/2018, signed by Judge James L. Robart. (SWT)
|
|
Filing
19
ORDER denying defendant's 6 Motion to Dismiss, signed by Judge James L. Robart. (SWT)
|
|
Filing
13
ORDER granting Plaintiff's 10 Motion for Extension on Response to 6 MOTION to Dismiss. Plaintiff's response due 7/5/2018; Defendant City of Seattle's 6 MOTION to Dismiss is re-noted for 7/13/2018. Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (PM)
|
|
Filing
9
STIPULATION AND ORDER continuing deadlines re parties' 8 Stipulation; FRCP 26f Conference Deadline is 7/16/2018, Initial Disclosure Deadline is 7/30/2018, Joint Status Report due by 8/6/2018, by Judge James L. Robart. (SWT)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Washington Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
